- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: California refuses to turn over voter rolls in the investigation into voter fraud
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:37 pm to buckeye_vol
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:37 pm to buckeye_vol
what's fricked up is the FEC could just issue an agency interpretation of some reg that says they have the power to demand rolls, and Chevron would kick in and that would likely be sufficient. Chevron is a plague
0
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:38 pm to SlowFlowPro
FYI
LINK
The Trump admin wants a lot of info
quote:
The letter, sent to the secretaries of state of all 50 states and obtained by The Hill, directs states to turn over “publicly-available voter roll data including, if publicly available under the laws of your state, the full first and last names of all registrants, middle names or initials if available, addresses, dates of birth, political party (if recorded in your state), last four digits of social security number if available, [and] voter history from 2006 onward”
LINK
The Trump admin wants a lot of info
This post was edited on 6/29/17 at 8:39 pm
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:38 pm to OnTheGeaux
I don't disagree.
But I know that they can be sued in court to update the voter rolls, as has been done in a few states already.
But I know that they can be sued in court to update the voter rolls, as has been done in a few states already.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:41 pm to VOLhalla
quote:
The Trump admin wants a lot of info
Publically available.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:42 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:But that's a big step from requiring states to provide:
But I know that they can be sued in court to update the voter rolls, as has been done in a few states already.
quote:
the full first and last names of all registrants, middle names or initials if available, addresses, dates of birth, political party (if recorded in your state), last four digits of social security number if available, [and] voter history from 2006 onward”
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:46 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:Yes. And states being compelled to:
And this lawsuit has to do with ROLLS!
quote:is not the same as turning over voter rolls to the federal government.
Both the NVRA and the federal Help America Vote Act require states to take reasonable steps to maintain accurate voting rolls.
quote:Then do it. And if it gets to SCOTUS who do you think is going to favor the feds. Gorsuch?
If judicial watch can file a lawsuit; why can't the DOJ?
This post was edited on 6/29/17 at 8:49 pm
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:47 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:May happen.
If judicial watch can file a lawsuit; why can't the DOJ?
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:48 pm to Jbird
If everything the Trump admin wants is already public info why aren't they just compiling the data themselves? I'm sure many states don't want to endure the expense of creating excel spreadsheets for the federal government when there's no law requiring them to do so.
If I were the California Secretary of State and I got that letter I'd write back pointing them to the state website and tell them to do their own damn leg work
If I were the California Secretary of State and I got that letter I'd write back pointing them to the state website and tell them to do their own damn leg work
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:49 pm to Jbird
I think it's possible as well. I'd need to think through it, but I suspect they have standing and basis.
This post was edited on 6/29/17 at 8:49 pm
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:49 pm to buckeye_vol
Ok. So the DOJ couldn't file the same lawsuit in a federal court against the state of California?
Then Trump has his information...but I've seen you arguments, been a part of trying to follow your circular logic, and it always ends up with you saying this and not saying that.
So, I'm going to just concede. I'm in too much of a bliss with all this MAGA this week to expend the energy of fricking with you.
But if your daddy Trump wants those ROLLS; your daddy is going to get those ROLLS.
Capisce?
Then Trump has his information...but I've seen you arguments, been a part of trying to follow your circular logic, and it always ends up with you saying this and not saying that.
So, I'm going to just concede. I'm in too much of a bliss with all this MAGA this week to expend the energy of fricking with you.
But if your daddy Trump wants those ROLLS; your daddy is going to get those ROLLS.
Capisce?
This post was edited on 6/29/17 at 8:52 pm
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:50 pm to Iowa Golfer
quote:And I suspect that if it got to SCOTUS, Gorsuch and the conservatives would rule against the DOJ. But maybe they can count on the big government loving left to rule in their favor.
I think it's possible as well. I'd need to think through it, but I suspect they have standing and basis.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:53 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:I never said they couldn't file a lawsuit.
Ok. So the DOJ couldn't file the same lawsuit in a federal court against the state of California?
quote:If the final filing is in DOJ's favor. Again, if it made it to SCOTUS, how do you think Gorsuch and the right would rule?
Then Trumo had his information.
quote:We're talking about the Constitution and laws, they are comprised of "this and not that."
and it always ends up with you saying this and not saying that.
quote:Such a leftist stance, but good for you putting it out there.
But if your daddy Trump wants those ROLLS; your daddy is going to get those ROLLS.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:53 pm to VOLhalla
quote:Federal highway funds say you will be my bitch.
I'm sure many states don't want to endure the expense of creating excel spreadsheets for the federal government when there's no law requiring them to do so.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:55 pm to buckeye_vol
I'll engage for a moment. It depends how it's framed. I can envision, and so can you, several arguments where Gorsuch would take the fed's position.
Immigration for one, and that's probably not even the best argument, but might be the easiest one.
I'll hang up now while you try to rewrite the Constitution.
Immigration for one, and that's probably not even the best argument, but might be the easiest one.
I'll hang up now while you try to rewrite the Constitution.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:56 pm to Iowa Golfer
quote:No need to rewrite something that explicitly gave election powers to the states and the legislature.
I'll hang up now while you try to rewrite the Constitution.
This post was edited on 6/29/17 at 8:58 pm
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:59 pm to buckeye_vol
In addition, an independent requirement in 42 U.S.C. 1974 mandates that all records and papers relating to any application, registration, or other act requisite to voting in any election for federal office, be preserved for a period of twenty-two months from that federal election. Since voter registration is unitary and permanent, this obligation is ongoing, such that registration records must be preserved as long as the voter registration to which they pertain is considered an “active” one under local law and practice, and those records cannot be disposed of until the expiration of twenty-two months following the date on which the registration ceased to be “active.” Hence, States should maintain all written records related to applications to register to vote as well as declinations to register to vote. The Department of Justice can require that such records be produced for inspection and copying through a written demand, and a lawsuit to enforce such demand.
LINK - Section 40
LINK - Section 40
This post was edited on 6/29/17 at 9:01 pm
Posted on 6/29/17 at 9:01 pm to OnTheGeaux
Well that about ends this thread.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 9:03 pm to OnTheGeaux
quote:So the DOJ can request
The Department of Justice can require that such records be produced for inspection and copying through a written demand, and a lawsuit to enforce such demand.
quote:Well then they can request those records.
States should maintain all written records related to applications to register to vote as well as declinations to register to vote.
This post was edited on 6/29/17 at 9:05 pm
Posted on 6/29/17 at 9:05 pm to buckeye_vol
While that's true, once again you ignore the most obvious and plausible counter argument. I'm going to guess, and not take time to look it up, there is probably federal code giving certain federal departments access to voter rolls, and probably court tested precedent.
In fact, I'm almost positive. Why won't I take time to look it up? I don't care that much, and you'd just move on to something else designed for argument, while adding very little reasonable content.
In fact, I'm almost positive. Why won't I take time to look it up? I don't care that much, and you'd just move on to something else designed for argument, while adding very little reasonable content.
This post was edited on 6/29/17 at 9:07 pm
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News